Letter: Middle ground needed on abortion debate

In chapter 15 of "Billions and Billions," Carl Sagan outlines his thoughts on the abortion debate and offers scientific arguments for establishing a middle ground between the positions of freedom and life.

Sagan, one of America¹s perennial rationalist and skeptics, was an enormously effective communicator who not only traveled where the evidence led but charismatically and passionately led us there as well.

In a time when opinion seems increasingly identity based and argument reeks of intellectual laziness, Sagan's words and work seem ever more important. In stark contrast to Mr. Sagan¹s writings Mr. Vigliotti's recent commentary concerning abortion and the elderly is hopelessly dogmatic and ill-informed. I don't think that we should treat life frivolously or promote abortion on the grounds of convenience. On that it would seem that Mr. Vigliotti and I agree. That being said, should the right to make such a decision in all cases reside with the government?

What about parents who discover that their child will be born with a debilitating genetic condition, should they be made to defer to the beliefs of a Joe Vigliotti for a decision about the quality of their life or the life of their child? The couple who struggles to have a child on their own and seeks in-vitro fertilization, are they guilty of a crime because of the sometimes dozens of embryo cultures that aren't selected for implantation? Or what of the patient facing a terminal illness who in the last days of their life would prefer to "die with dignity" as opposed to lingering painfully attached to machines? Considering these issues alone quickly exposes the absurdity of taking a 100 percent pro-life stance and illustrates the danger of proposing legislation that lacks a rational or scientifically informed foundation.

Mr. Vigliotti is, of course, free to defer to Iron Age absolutisms as he considers the challenges of the 21st century but he shouldn't expect us all to check our reason at the door.